AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X Review

Scientific & Engineering Computations, & HPC Performance

For these tests, we’re using the SPECwpc benchmark suite for workstations with its wide variety of tasks. It tests a number of very different mathematical computations optimized for parallelization. They typically make heavy use of available memory bandwidth and cache, plus expose issues with latency.


The pre-Euler3D CFD test (Computational Fluid Dynamics benchmark) runs very well, with AMD’s Ryzen Threadripper posting great results. It’s interesting to see that the overclocked processors don’t really improve performance all that much.


In this benchmark, a mathematical operation is performed on two functions (convolution), which results in a third function. Performance scales similarly well with core count and clock rate.


This test is based on the finite element method for three-dimensional structural computations. The Ryzen Threadripper 1950X does edge out Intel’s Core i9-7900X flagship.

Poisson's Equation

Poisson's Equation is a second-order partial differential equation widely used in physics for boundary value problems.

Overclocking AMD’s Threadripper processors doesn’t yield much of a performance increase. Meanwhile, Intel’s Core i9-7900X dominates the field. The Threadripper chip posts better results than Intel’s remaining Core i9 CPUs, but it needs a lot more cores in order to keep up.

Sequential Reweighted Message Passing (SRMP)

These are algorithms for discrete energy minimization. None of AMD’s processors do well. However, the Threadripper CPU is able to compensate to some degree using core count, whereas the Ryzen 7 CPUs fall way behind.

Kirchhoff Migration

The earth’s subsurface structure can be determined via seismic processing. One of the four basic steps in this process is the Kirchhoff Migration, which is used to generate an image based on the available data using mathematical operations. This benchmark and its underlying computations turn out to be a great fit for AMD’s Ryzen Threadripper processor.

The Threadripper 1950X is a good choice for these tasks. The only exceptions are software packages that just aren't well-optimized for it, such as the SRMP test. Surely, developers will be more cognizant of AMD's hardware moving forward, now that the company has a competitive architecture designed to tantalize this market.

Consequently, negative outliers should become a less and less frequent, just as they have on the desktop with Ryzen 7, 5, and 3. Bottom line: the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X is a great choice when computing power and easily parallelized tasks are involved.


MORE: Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy

MORE: All CPUs Content

Create a new thread in the UK Article comments forum about this subject
This thread is closed for comments
Comment from the forums
    Your comment
  • vMax
    Very good in depth review. Threadripper looks like a great productivity CPU especially for the price to performance... At last AMD are back at the big table and thats not to put Intel down as they still make the fastest CPU's overall...just you have pay that much more for the privilege, but finaly we have a real choice at all price points... Great for the consumer. Good job Tom's and AMD.
  • HEXiT
    so happy this has happend. intel wont be, but for amd, its great news. 95%+ the perfomance for half the price makes threadripper a very attractive cpu for virtual machines and even office environments that use terminals rather than every 1 using a desktop.
    so much potential for a £2k build that just wasnt there a year ago...
  • fla56
    where is XFR testing?

    surely it's clear by now that the worst way to overclock a Ryzen is to try and overclock the cores?
  • gferrin2012
    Hmm. I will first state I have no preference to AMD nor Intel. I can buy any CPU, or GPU that suits my needs. I looked over you "benches" and I will be very upfront. I do not believe yours. I think the "threadripper" benches a lot better than your are showing. Your test methods seem to favor Intel. I have long suspected and heard of Toms Hardware of being an Intel fanboy site. I have owned Intel and swore by them for years. In am considering AMD for the first time. I will continue to look at, what I believe, to be more honest test sites. Lets see how this plays out. I happen to have a friend who has an 1800x and and another associate that has an I7-7700k. I am familiar with Blenders Bmw benchmark. I would like an explanation as to why, in CPU rendering using blender 2.78c, the 1800x literally destroys the I7-7700k.
    If you look at my account (go ahead) here on Toms Hardware, you will notice I am not an AMD fanboy at all. When I start feeling I am getting biased reviews and have the sneaking suspicion of Intel slipping the 'ol kickback to you, it's time to delete my membership.
  • HEXiT
    i think the variance between these and other benches is the way they have done em... maybe they didnt set the cpu to productivity and just used gaming mode or vies-versa. but there is some discrepancy between what im seeing here and elsewhere. whats up toms. normally your stuff is accurate.